Search

BackgroundThe Worldwide Innovative Network (WIN) Consortium has developed the Simplified Interventional Mapping System (SIMS) to better define the cancer molecular milieu based on genomics/transcriptomics from tumor and analogous normal tissue biopsies. SPRING is the first trial to assess a SIMS-based tri-therapy regimen in advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).MethodsPatients with advanced NSCLC (no EGFR, ALK, or ROS1 alterations; PD-L1 unrestricted; ≤2 prior therapy lines) received avelumab, axitinib, and palbociclib (3 + 3 dose escalation design).ResultsFifteen patients were treated (five centers, four countries): six at each of dose levels 1 (DL1) and DL2; three at DL3. The most common ≥Grade 3 adverse events were neutropenia, hypertension, and fatigue. The recommended Phase II dose (RP2D) was DL1: avelumab 10 mg/kg IV q2weeks, axitinib 3 mg po bid, and palbociclib 75 mg po daily (7 days off/21 days on). Four patients (27%) achieved a partial response (PR) (progression-free survival [PFS]: 14, 24, 25 and 144+ weeks), including two after progression on pembrolizumab. Four patients attained stable disease (SD) that lasted ≥24 weeks: 24, 27, 29, and 64 weeks. At DL1 (RP2D), four of six patients (66%) achieved stable disease (SD) ≥6 months/PR (2 each). Responders included patients with no detectable PD-L1 expression and low tumor mutational burden.ConclusionsOverall, eight of 15 patients (53%) achieved clinical benefit (SD ≥ 24 weeks/PR) on the avelumab, axitinib, and palbociclib combination. This triplet showed antitumor activity in NSCLC, including in tumors post-pembrolizumab progression, and was active at the RP2D, which was well tolerated. NCT03386929 clinicaltrial.gov.

BackgroundPrecision oncology uses molecular profiling of tumors to identify biomarker-tailored therapies for patients in the hope of improving outcomes. Typically, only a minority of patients receives evaluable matched treatment. This study explored the reasons for attrition on a precision medicine trial.Materials and methodsStudy participants were 190 adult patients who consented to the I-PREDICT (Investigation of molecular Profile-Related Evidence Determining Individualized Cancer Therapy) trial. Patients had metastatic and/or unresectable incurable malignancies. Patients who were not evaluable were analyzed.ResultsOf consented patients, 44% were not evaluable. Men were twice as likely to be not evaluable as women. Prominently, 45% of patients who were not evaluable dropped off because of death, hospice referral, or decline in organ function.ConclusionHealth deterioration of consented patients is a significant barrier to being evaluable on the I-PREDICT trial. These data suggest that patients are enrolled on precision oncology trials too late in their disease course or with excessive disease burden.

Cancer treatments have evolved from indiscriminate cytotoxic agents to selective genome- and immune-targeted drugs that have transformed the outcomes of some malignancies1. Tumor complexity and heterogeneity suggest that the 'precision medicine' paradigm of cancer therapy requires treatment to be personalized to the individual patient2-6. To date, precision oncology trials have been based on molecular matching with predetermined monotherapies7-14. Several of these trials have been hindered by very low matching rates, often in the 5-10% range15, and low response rates. Low matching rates may be due to the use of limited gene panels, restrictive molecular matching algorithms, lack of drug availability, or the deterioration and death of end-stage patients before therapy can be implemented. We hypothesized that personalized treatment with combination therapies would improve outcomes in patients with refractory malignancies. As a first test of this concept, we implemented a cross-institutional prospective study (I-PREDICT, NCT02534675 ) that used tumor DNA sequencing and timely recommendations for individualized treatment with combination therapies. We found that administration of customized multidrug regimens was feasible, with 49% of consented patients receiving personalized treatment. Targeting of a larger fraction of identified molecular alterations, yielding a higher 'matching score', was correlated with significantly improved disease control rates, as well as longer progression-free and overall survival rates, compared to targeting of fewer somatic alterations. Our findings suggest that the current clinical trial paradigm for precision oncology, which pairs one driver mutation with one drug, may be optimized by treating molecularly complex and heterogeneous cancers with combinations of customized agents.

Carcinoma of unknown primary (CUP) is a rare and difficult-to-treat malignancy, the management of which might be improved by the identification of actionable driver mutations. We interrogated 54 to 70 genes in 442 patients with CUP using targeted clinical-grade, next-generation sequencing of circulating tumor DNA (ctDNA). Overall, 80% of patients exhibited ctDNA alterations; 66% (290/442) ≥1 characterized alteration(s), excluding variants of unknown significance. TP53-associated genes were most commonly altered [37.8% (167/442)], followed by genes involved in the MAPK pathway [31.2% (138/442)], PI3K signaling [18.1% (80/442)], and the cell-cycle machinery [10.4% (46/442)]. Among 290 patients harboring characterized alterations, distinct genomic profiles were observed in 87.9% (255/290) of CUP cases, with 99.7% (289/290) exhibiting potentially targetable alterations. An illustrative patient with dynamic changes in ctDNA content during therapy and a responder given a checkpoint inhibitor-based regimen because of a mismatch repair gene anomaly are presented. Our results demonstrate that ctDNA evaluation is feasible in CUP and that most patients harbor a unique somatic profile with pharmacologically actionable alterations, justifying the inclusion of noninvasive liquid biopsies in next-generation clinical trials. Cancer Res; 77(16); 4238-46. ©2017 AACR.

The many improvements in breast cancer therapy in recent years have so lowered rates of recurrence that it is now difficult or impossible to conduct adequately powered adjuvant clinical trials. Given the many new drugs and potential synergistic combinations, the neoadjuvant approach has been used to test benefit of drug combinations in clinical trials of primary breast cancer. A recent FDA-led meta-analysis showed that pathologic complete response (pCR) predicts disease-free survival (DFS) within patients who have specific breast cancer subtypes. This meta-analysis motivated the FDA's draft guidance for using pCR as a surrogate endpoint in accelerated drug approval. Using pCR as a registration endpoint was challenged at ASCO 2014 Annual Meeting with the presentation of ALTTO, an adjuvant trial in HER2-positive breast cancer that showed a nonsignificant reduction in DFS hazard rate for adding lapatinib, a HER-family tyrosine kinase inhibitor, to trastuzumab and chemotherapy. This conclusion seemed to be inconsistent with the results of NeoALTTO, a neoadjuvant trial that found a statistical improvement in pCR rate for the identical lapatinib-containing regimen. We address differences in the two trials that may account for discordant conclusions. However, we use the FDA meta-analysis to show that there is no discordance at all between the observed pCR difference in NeoALTTO and the observed HR in ALTTO. This underscores the importance of appropriately modeling the two endpoints when designing clinical trials. The I-SPY 2/3 neoadjuvant trials exemplify this approach.

New approaches to drug development are critically needed to lessen the time, cost, and resources necessary to identify and optimize active agents. Strategies to accelerate drug development include testing drugs earlier in the disease process, such as the neoadjuvant setting. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued guidance designed to accelerate drug approval through the use of neoadjuvant studies in which the surrogate short-term endpoint, pathologic response, can be used to identify active agents and shorten the time to approval of both efficacious drugs and biomarkers identifying patients most likely to respond. However, this approach has unique challenges. In particular, issues of patient safety are paramount, given the exposure of potentially curable patients to investigational agents with limited safety experience. Key components to safe drug development in the neoadjuvant setting include defining a study population at sufficiently poor prognosis with standard therapy to justify exposure to investigational agents, defining the extent and adequacy of safety data from phase I, detecting potentially harmful interactions between investigational and standard therapies, improving study designs, such as adaptive strategies, that limit patient exposure to ineffective agents, and intensifying safety monitoring in the course of the trial. The I-SPY2 trial is an example of a phase II neoadjuvant trial of novel agents for breast cancer in which these issues have been addressed, both in the design and conduct of the trial. These adaptations of phase II design enable acceleration of drug development by reducing time and cost to screen novel therapies for activity without compromising safety.

Surgery is one of the most effective and widely used procedures in treating human cancers, but a major problem is that the surgeon often fails to remove the entire tumor, leaving behind tumor-positive margins, metastatic lymph nodes, and/or satellite tumor nodules. Here we report the use of a hand-held spectroscopic pen device (termed SpectroPen) and near-infrared contrast agents for intraoperative detection of malignant tumors, based on wavelength-resolved measurements of fluorescence and surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) signals. The SpectroPen utilizes a near-infrared diode laser (emitting at 785 nm) coupled to a compact head unit for light excitation and collection. This pen-shaped device effectively removes silica Raman peaks from the fiber optics and attenuates the reflected excitation light, allowing sensitive analysis of both fluorescence and Raman signals. Its overall performance has been evaluated by using a fluorescent contrast agent (indocyanine green, or ICG) as well as a surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) contrast agent (pegylated colloidal gold). Under in vitro conditions, the detection limits are approximately 2-5 x [10.sup.-11] M for the indocyanine dye and 0.5-1 x [10.sup.-13] M for the SERS contrast agent. Ex vivo tissue penetration data show attenuated but resolvable fluorescence and Raman signals when the contrast agents are buried 5-10 mm deep in fresh animal tissues. In vivo studies using mice bearing bioluminescent 4T1 breast tumors further demonstrate that the tumor borders can be precisely detected preoperatively and intraoperatively, and that the contrast signals are strongly correlated with tumor bioluminescence. After surgery, the SpeetroPen device permits further evaluation of both positive and negative tumor margins around the surgical cavity, raising new possibilities for real-time tumor detection and image-guided surgery. 10.1021/ac102058k